Early Experience with a Novel Nonmetallic Cable in Reconstructive Hip Surgery

BackgroundMetallic wires and cables are commonly used in primary and revision THA for fixation of periprosthetic fractures and osteotomies of the greater trochanter. These systems provide secure fixation and high healing rates but fraying, third-body generation, accelerated wear of the bearing surface, and injury to the surgical team remain concerning.Questions/purposesWe determined the rate of cable failure, union, and complications associated with a novel, nonmetallic cerclage cable in periprosthetic fracture and osteotomy fixation during THA.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 29 patients who had primary and revision THAs using nonmetallic cables. Indications for use included fixation of an extended trochanteric osteotomy, intraoperative fracture of the proximal femur, strut allograft fixation, and a Vancouver B1 periprosthetic fracture of the femur. All patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically immediately postoperatively, at 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and then annually thereafter. The minimum followup was 13 months (mean, 21 months; range, 13–30 months).ResultsTwo of the 29 patients (7%) developed a nonunion; all remaining osteotomies, fractures and allografts had healed at the time of most recent evaluation. Four patients (14%) dislocated postoperatively; two were treated successfully with closed reduction, while the other two required reoperation. We identified no evidence of breakage or other complications directly attributable to the cables.ConclusionsThe nonmetallic periprosthetic cables used in this series provided adequate fixation to allow for both osteotomy and fracture healing. We did not observe any complications directly related to the cables.Level of Evidence Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

[1]  A. Rosenberg,et al.  Extended trochanteric osteotomy in complex primary total hip arthroplasty. A brief note. , 2003, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[2]  B. Morrey,et al.  Dislocation After Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Analysis of Risk Factors and Treatment Options , 2002, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[3]  J. Charnley,et al.  Total hip replacement by low-friction arthroplasty. , 1970, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[4]  C. Engh,et al.  Roentgenographic assessment of the biologic fixation of porous-surfaced femoral components. , 1990, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[5]  D. Mulcahy,et al.  The use of uncemented extensively porous-coated femoral components in the management of Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[6]  S. Kelley,et al.  Debris From Cobalt‐Chrome Cable May Cause Acetabular Loosening , 1992, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[7]  T D Brown,et al.  The Frank Stinchfield Award. Contribution of cable debris generation to accelerated polyethylene wear. , 1997, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[8]  M. Ritter,et al.  A clinical, radiographic, and cost comparison of cerclage techniques: wires vs cables. , 2006, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[9]  J O Galante,et al.  Complications of a cable grip system. , 1996, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[10]  B. Masri,et al.  The reliability and validity of the Vancouver classification of femoral fractures after hip replacement. , 2000, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[11]  B. Masri,et al.  Fractures of the femur after hip replacement. , 1995, Instructional course lectures.

[12]  B. Bierbaum,et al.  Trochanteric osteotomy: analysis of pattern of wire fixation failure and complications. , 1979, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[13]  F. Horan The National Joint Registry for England and Wales. , 2003, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[14]  Paul B. Lewis,et al.  Extended trochanteric osteotomy for the treatment of vancouver B2/B3 periprosthetic fractures of the femur. , 2008, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[15]  B. Masri,et al.  Periprosthetic Fractures Evaluation and Treatment , 2004, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[16]  K. Saleh,et al.  Component removal in revision total hip arthroplasty. , 2004, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[17]  John J Callaghan,et al.  Cemented total hip replacement cable debris and acetabular construct durability. , 2009, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[18]  P. D. Di Cesare,et al.  Fixation Systems of Greater Trochanteric Osteotomies: Biomechanical and Clinical Outcomes , 2007, The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

[19]  W. Paprosky,et al.  Classification and an Algorithmic Approach to the Reconstruction of Femoral Deficiency in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty , 2003, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[20]  R. Berger,et al.  Use of the extended trochanteric osteotomy in treating prosthetic hip infection. , 2009, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[21]  J. Pritchett Fracture of the Greater Trochanter After Hip Replacement , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[22]  M A Ritter,et al.  Trochanteric fixation by cable grip in hip replacement. , 1991, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[23]  C. Engh,et al.  Extended Slide Trochanteric Osteotomy for Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty* , 2000, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[24]  A W Miles,et al.  Re-attachment of the greater trochanter. The use of the trochanter cable-grip system. , 1983, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[25]  R. Barrack,et al.  Current Status of Trochanteric Reattachment in Complex Total Hip Arthroplasty , 2005, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[26]  T. Bauer,et al.  Abrasive Three-Body Wear of Polyethylene Caused by Broken Multifilament Cables of a Total Hip Prosthesis A Report of Three Cases* , 1996, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[27]  W. Harris,et al.  Trochanteric osteotomy for revision total hip arthroplasty. 97% union rate using a comprehensive approach. , 1988, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.